Items in cart [0]
| [ Top of Page ] [ Home ] [ Contact Us ] [ Help ] [ The National Academies Home ] | ||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGy FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL
CLEANUP
AT
HANFORD
Committee on the Review of the Hanford Site's
Environmental Remediation Science and Technology Plan
Board on Radioactive Waste Management
Division on Earth and Life Studies
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.
OCR for page R2
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the
Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are
drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National
Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the
committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special
competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.
Support for this study was provided by the U.S. Department of Energy
under cooperative agreement number DE-FC01-99EW59049. All opinions,
findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed herein are those of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of
Energy.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-07596-3
Additional copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Box 285
Washington, DC 20055
800-624-6242
202-334-3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan Area)
http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
ii
OCR for page R3
National Acaclemy of Sciences
National Academy of Engineering
Institute of Meclicine
National Research Council
Or;-
U\~ . UN. ,,>.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit,
self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and
engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and
technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of
the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a
mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and
technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of
Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964,
under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel
organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration
and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of
Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The
National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs
aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and
recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is
president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National
Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of
appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to
the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to
the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an
adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify
issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth Shine is
president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National
Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science
and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and
of advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general
policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal
operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the
National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government,
the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is
administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr.
Bruce Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chairman and vice-chairman,
respectively, of the National Research Council.
...
///
OCR for page R4
OCR for page R5
~ GOMMItrEE ON THE REVIEW OF THE HANFORD SITE'S
ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
PLAN
CHRIS G. WHIPPLE, Chair, ENVIRON International Corporation
Emeryville, California
D. WAYNE BERMAN, Aeolus, Inc., Albany, California
SUE B. CLARK, Washington State University, Pullman
JOHN C. FOUNTAIN, State University of New York, Buffalo
LYNN W. GELHAR, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
LISA C. GREEN, Lucent Technologies, Norcross, Georgia
ROBERT O. HALL, University of Wyoming, Laramie
EDWIN E. HERRICKS, University of Illinois, Urbana
BRUCE D. IHONEYMAN, Colorado School of Mines, Golden
SALOMON LEVY, Levy & Associates, San Jose, California
JAMES K. MITCHELL, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
(retired), Blacksburg
LEON T. SILVER, California Institute of Technology (retirecl), Pasadena
LESLIE SMITH, University of British Columbia, Vancouver
DAVID A. STONESTROM, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park,
California
Staff
KEVIN D. CROWLEY, Study Director
ANGELA R. TAYLOR, Senior Project Assistant
v
OCR for page R6
BOARD ON RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT
JOHN F. AHEARNE, Chair, Sigma Xi and Duke University, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina
CHARLES MCCOMBIE, Vice-Chair, Consultant, Gipf-Oberfrick,
Switzerland
ROBERT M. BERNERO, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (retired),
Gaithersburg, Maryland
ROBERT J. BUDNITZ, Future Resources Associates, Inc., Berkeley,
California
GREGORY R. CHOPPIN, Florida State University, Tallahassee
RODNEY EWING, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
JAMES H. JOHNSON, JR., Howard University, Washington, D.C.
ROGER E. KASPERSON, Stockholm Environment Institute, Sweden
NIKOLAY LAVEROV, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
JANE C.S. LONG, Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada, Reno
ALEXANDER MACLACHLAN, E.l. du Pont de Nemours & Company
(retired), Wilmington, Delaware
WILLIAM A. MILLS, Oak Ridge Associated Universities (retired), Olney,
Maryland
MARTIN J. STEINDLER, Argonne National Laboratory (retired), Downers
Grove, Illinois
ATSUYUKI SUZUKI, University of Tokyo, Japan
JOHN J. TAYLOR, Electric Power Research Institute (retired), Palo Alto,
California
VICTORIAN. TSCHINKEL, Landers and Parsons, Tallahassee, Florida
Staff
KEVIN D. CROWLEY, Director
MICAH D. LOWENTHAL, Staff Officer
BARBARA PASTINA, Staff Officer
GREGORY H. SYMMES, Senior Staff Officer
J O H N R. W I L KY, Sen for Staff Officer
SUSAN B. MOCKLER, Research Associate
TONI GREENLEAF, Administrative Associate
DARLA J. THOMPSON, Senior Project AssistanVResearch Assistant
LATRICIA C. BAILEY, Senior Project Assistant
LAURA D. LLANOS, Senior Project Assistant
ANGELA R. TAYLOR, Senior Project Assistant
JAMES YATES, JR., Office Assistant
vl
OCR for page R7
Preface
This study was undertaken in response to a request to the
National Research Council (NRC) from the Department of Energy's
(DOE's) Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management. The request
was that the NRC conduct a review of the science and technology
program designed to address subsurface contamination at the Hanford
Site.
The environmental aspects of managing wastes at the Hanford
Site have been addressed in several NRC studies by various committees,
going back to the mid-1960s. A major focus of these studies has been on
the high-level waste storage tanks in the 200 Area, which is located near
the center of the site. DOE regards remediation of the 200 Area tank
farms as its largest and longest-term environmental challenge. Although
much of DOE's past work has focused on the characterization of tank
wastes and on the treatment technologies that will be used to stabilize the
wastes to make them suitable for disposal, comparatively less effort and
attention has been applied to the soil and groundwater at the site.
It has long been known that hazardous wastes have leaked from
storage tanks into the underlying soil. In addition, there were direct
discharges of liquid waste streams to cribs and ponds on the site when
Hanford was producing plutonium for the U.S. nuclear weapons program.
There are large uncertainties in the quantities and current locations of
materials that were released to the Hanford subsurface. These
uncertainties are due in part to the difficulty and expense associated with
characterizing soils in the vicinity of the waste tanks and also to the
cliff culty in characterizing vadose (i.e., unsaturated) zone contamination
in general. Unlike groundwater contamination, which tends to form
plumes that can be monitored and characterized, vadose zone
contamination can follow narrow and variable flow paths that are difficult
to detect.
Prior to the mid-1 990s, it was generally thought that the sorption
capabilities of the soil in the 200 Area would result in limited migration of
waste. In particular, it was thought that radioactive cesium would largely
be retained in the top several feet of soil. I lowever, this view was
challenged when measurements revealed elevated levels of radionuclides
deep beneath the tanks and in the groundwater under the tanks. When
this was first reported, there was speculation that the measured
concentrations at depth were due to inadvertent contamination during
drilling. An alternative theory was that there may be fast flow paths in the
vadose zone. While the soils in the 200 Area would, based on their
average properties, retain cesium and other radionuclides through
chemical sorption, these average properties may not determine all
potential flow and transport.
vii
OCR for page R8
In response to the lack of definitive information about the location
and mobility of wastes in the subsurface, and with the encouragement of
DOE Headquarters personnel, the Hanford Site management established
the GroundwaterNadose Zone Integration Project. The science and
technology component of that project is the subject of this report. As
indicated in the table of contents, the report addresses the elements of
the Integration Project science and technology plan, including the vadose
zone, groundwater, Columbia River, remediation and monitoring, risk, and
the System Assessment Capability, which is a risk assessment tool in its
early stages of development.
As discussed in detail in this report, one of the committee's major
conclusions is that there is a great need for better characterization of the
subsurface, especially of the vadose zone. Although other work to
understand the processes that contribute to the mobility of the wastes and
to the modeling of their migration can be useful, such work is of limited
value without additional site data. Such characterization data are also
needed to test theories about the processes that are important to waste
migration so that models of contaminant migration can be refined. A
limiting factor in the collection of such site data is cost, which points to the
need for more effective and less expensive technologies for
characterization.
The committee has been assisted in its efforts by a high level of
cooperation and responsiveness from people at the Department of
Energy and in the DOE contractor organizations. We especially note the
assistance provided by our three main points of contact: Mark Freshley of
the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL); Michael Graham of
Bechtel Hanford, Inc.; and Michael Thompson of the DOE Richland
Operations Office. Mark was the committee's main liaison on the science
program and handled many requests from the committee for information.
We also thank John Zachara of PNNL, who served as a technical guide to
the Hanford Site and its associated science and technology projects, and
Roy Gephart, who served as a technical guide and provided a very helpful
review of Chapter 2.
The committee was also assisted in its efforts by the Hanford
representative from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Doug
Sherwood; from the Washington State Department of Ecology, Dib
Goswami; and from the Oregon Office of Energy, Dirk Dunning. In
addition, the committee was kept informed of the activities of the
Integration Project Expert Panel (IPEP). Ed Berkey of Concurrent
Technologies, Inc., chairman of IPEP, briefed the committee at its first
meeting and kept the committee informed through Kevin Crowley, study
director for this project. The committee also had the benefit of discussions
with the vice-chairman of IPEP, Mike Kavanaugh of Malcolm-Pirnie, Inc.
Information was provided to the committee in presentations and
through other means by Harry Boston of the DOE Office of River
...
Vlil
OCR for page R9
Protection, Gerald Boycl of DOE, Office of Environmental Management
(EM) (Headquarters), Wade Ballard of the DOE-Richland Operations
Office (RL), Mary Harmon of DOE-EM (Headquarters), and Mike Hughes,
president of Bechtel Hanford, Inc. Appendix B includes a full list of the
people who made presentations to the committee. Priscilla Yamada of
PNNL and Virginia Rohay of Bechtel Hanford, Inc. provided logistical
support.
Finally, the support provided to the committee by Kevin Crowley
was exceptional. Kevin worked with people at DOE and the Hanford
contractor organizations to get the right questions asked of the
appropriate people, helped arrange the meeting agendas with the right
balance of presentations and time for discussion, and kept track of the
numerous "loose ends" that the committee generated as it worked to
understand the situation at Hanford and the evolving nature of the Vadose
Zone/Groundwater Science and Technology Project. The committee
faced a steep learning curve, and Kevin helped to identify and define the
important issues and activities that the committee needed to focus on,
while simultaneously respecting that the committee was to reach its own
conclusions. With the help of Angela Taylor, the committee was kept
organized and provided with a nearly unlimited supply of reading material.
Angela also handled many of the travel and meeting logistics for the
committee.
At the time this report went into final review by the National
Research Council, a full set of the presentation materials from the
committee's meetings at the Hanford site was available on-line at
http://www.bhi-erc.com/projects/vadose/peer/nas.htm.
Chris Whipple
Chair
ix
OCR for page R10
Reviewer Acknowledgments
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen
for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with
procedures approved by the NRC's Report Review Committee. The
purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical
comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as
sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional
standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study
charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to
protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the
following individuals for their review of this report:
Michael O. Annable, University of Florida
Charles C. Coutant, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Robert J. Naiman, University of Washington
Donald T. Reed, Argonne National Laboratory
John J. Taylor, Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. (retired)
Peter J. Wierenga, University of Arizona
James G. Wenzel, Marine Development Associates, Inc.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many
constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse
the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the
report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by
George Hornberger, University of Virginia, appointed by the National
Research Council, who was responsible for making certain that an
independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with
institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully
considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely
with the authoring committee and the institution.
x
OCR for page R11
Contents -
SUMMARY, 1
1 INTRODUCTION AND TASK, 6
2 HANFORD SITE BACKGROUND, 11
3 OVERVIEW OF THE INTEGRATION PROJECT, 40
4 SYSTEM ASSESSMENT CAPABILITY, 51
5 INVENTORY TECHNICAL ELEMENT, 66
6 VADOSE ZONE TECHNICAL ELEMENT, 79
7 GROUNDWATER TECHNICAL ELEMENT, 100
8 COLUMBIA RIVER TECHNICAL ELEMENT, 108
9 MONITORING, REMEDIATION, AND RISK TECHNICAL
ELEMENTS, 125
1 0 IMPROVING S&T PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS, 141
REFERENCES, 154
APPENDIXES
A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES, 163
B INFORMATION-GATHERING MEETINGS, 168
C SCALING ISSUES APPLICABLE TO ENVIRONMENTAL
SYSTEMS, 171
D ACRONYMS, 180
Xl
i
OCR for page R12